Sanrast

Cercei was right, Tyrion was wrong.

37 posts in this topic

Hi, I don't come here often so I'm sorry if this topic has been brought up already. 

A lot of people say Tyrion is very smart. So I was thinking about Myrcella. Cercei was right that she didn't want her away, and Tyrion was wrong about sending her to Dorne. The Lannisers beat Baratheon army so Myrcella would be safe in King's Landing but instead Tyrion send her to Dorne and she was murdered by Martells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not been here in over two years, I believe. Tyrion was correct that Myrcella would be safe as she was under the protection of the prince. Tyrion could not have foreseen that a plot would develop around her that the prince and her white knight could not protect against. I am hoping that we learn who talked ("someone always talks"), and whether Darkstar was in cahoots with the Martels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She WAS safe, it' was Cersei's own actions in KL what lead to Myrcella's death

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Myrcella was safe and in love with her betrothed in Dorne.  Cersei brought about the whole Tyrion-on-trial-for-Joffrey's-death thing, which led to the trial by combat that resulted in the death of Oberyn.  The Red Vipers death drove Ellaria to kill Prince Doran and murder Myrcella.

Tyrion was right.  He drinks and he knows things...

Edited by Jaehaerys Stark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cersei and Tyrion both had reasonable arguments and there is no way to evaluate who was right.  I actually think Tyrion went about it all completely wrong - what if it was LF instead of Pycelle who spoke to Cersei, would he have sent Myrcella to the Vale instead?  Arguably that would have ended much worse.  It is meant to be a clever trick but Tyrion isn't quite as smart as he needs to believe he is.

Ultimately Ellaria and the Sand Snakes (or really D&D) killed Myrcella.  Not Tyrion or Cersei.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the idea of sending her to dawn was a good one. They had no idea that tywin was coming to help and that meant they would likely lose. The fault for marcella dying was cersei for that fake trial and ogren for being an idiot while fighting the mountain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lucius Lovejoy said:

Cersei and Tyrion both had reasonable arguments and there is no way to evaluate who was right.  I actually think Tyrion went about it all completely wrong - what if it was LF instead of Pycelle who spoke to Cersei, would he have sent Myrcella to the Vale instead?  Arguably that would have ended much worse.  It is meant to be a clever trick but Tyrion isn't quite as smart as he needs to believe he is.

Ultimately Ellaria and the Sand Snakes (or really D&D) killed Myrcella.  Not Tyrion or Cersei.

This!

However, I think Cersei was right.

Tyrion would know that Westerosi families can be ruthless and unpredictable in their pursuit of revenge, and he would also know that Dorne has reason to want revenge upon the Lannisters. Given that, why send Myrcella there? I never got that decision by Tyrion, not in the novels, not on the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Lucius Lovejoy said:

Cersei and Tyrion both had reasonable arguments and there is no way to evaluate who was right.  I actually think Tyrion went about it all completely wrong - what if it was LF instead of Pycelle who spoke to Cersei, would he have sent Myrcella to the Vale instead?  Arguably that would have ended much worse.  It is meant to be a clever trick but Tyrion isn't quite as smart as he needs to believe he is.

Ultimately Ellaria and the Sand Snakes (or really D&D) killed Myrcella.  Not Tyrion or Cersei.

Yes and yes. 

Tyrion didn't really mind where Myrcella would end up, he was fine with any of the options, he would have sent her to Pyke or the Vale if it had been Varys or LF to spill to Cersei. Myrcella was the princess of the seven kingdoms. I don't think it was wrong of Tyrion to assume that she would be safe in any of those places. It would, after all, tie those houses to the crown, make them allies, who wouldn't want to be friends with the (then) powerful Lannisters and KL? But thank you for pointing out that Tyrion isn't a genius. As for Cersei, she did one idiotic thing after the other, and if Myrcella had been to stay in KL, she would still have died one way or the other, because the show needed it to happen and Cersei couldn't take care of the two kids she had around herself either, why would it have been different with Myrcella? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an interesting discussion, with many excellent points already having been made.

There are a lot of ways we could look at this.

One way would be to say Myrcella was doomed (and IS doomed in the books) b/c of the prophecy, which is undoubtedly true.  Myrcella would have died no matter where she was sent (or not sent, if she had stayed in King's Landing).

On the other hand, looking back on it, knowing what Tyrion surely must have known at the time, I have to say...he sent her to DORNE???

Tyrion HAD to have known there were people in Dorne who hated the Lannisters (cuz of what happened to Elia and her children, at the hands of a Lannister man, Gregor Clegane).  So, of all places, he sends her to DORNE??

Why didn't he send her to Casterly Rock?  Has this ever been discussed or considered?  Even if you argue he wanted to marry her off to make alliances, my goodness, I think the way he went about it was idiotically dangerous.  Hey, I've got an idea. Maybe he should have sent Myrcella to Casterly Rock and let Trystane come to HER.

It's true that this issue could twist and turn in a lot of directions given a lot of different factors, and it's also certainly true that (ironically enough) Cersei herself contributed heavily to the chain of events that led to Myrcella's death, but on balance, I think I've got to generally agree with the original poster above.  Knowing what I know about Westeros, and what Tyrion surely must have known at the time, and looking back at that moment, if I had been standing there when Tyrion and Cersei discussed it, I think I would have said to Tyrion "Dorne??? Are you nuts!?!?  I can think of about 15 places that would be safer!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cron said:

One way would be to say Myrcella was doomed (and IS doomed in the books) b/c of the prophecy, which is undoubtedly true.

I dig most of what you said, especially the Casterly Rock alternative, but this caught my eye.  Do you think Maggy the Frog's fortelling of the future means it really is inevitable?  My take on it has been that Cersei's actions with this fortelling in mind are what make her children's deaths and her own accelerated.  Not the prophecy itself.  In a way it is like the Christian believe in free will, God knows what we will do before we do it because he knows us so well, but his knowing does not supercede our independent action.  I feel like that sort of like how Maggy's predictions to Cersei worked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lucius Lovejoy said:

I dig most of what you said, especially the Casterly Rock alternative, but this caught my eye.  Do you think Maggy the Frog's fortelling of the future means it really is inevitable?  My take on it has been that Cersei's actions with this fortelling in mind are what make her children's deaths and her own accelerated.  Not the prophecy itself.  In a way it is like the Christian believe in free will, God knows what we will do before we do it because he knows us so well, but his knowing does not supercede our independent action.  I feel like that sort of like how Maggy's predictions to Cersei worked.

Great food for thought.

I think only GRRM can definitively answer this question, cuz it relates to how "magic" works in the universe of ASOIAF.

But here's my understanding of it:  Prophecies are real in ASOIAF, and DO come true (assuming the are foretold by people who actually have the gift, or "magic," of prophecy).  Naturally, as with so much fantasy fiction, it almost NEVER works out the way it at first seems it will, but it DOES come true. To my knowledge, Maggy's prophecies were all real, and have come true.

I think you basically raise a question about "self-fulfilling prophecies"(my words).   My view:  Doesn't matter whether we are talking about self-fulfilling prophecies here or not, it seems clear to me that in the ASOIAF universe, ALL of Cersei's children are doomed, one way or the other.

But again, that's just my view.  Only GRRM knows for sure, I think.  If he says I'm wrong, then I'm wrong, in the context of ASOIAF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cersei was right that Myrcella wouldn't be safe in Dorne.

But...

There was no place where Myrcella would be really safe. This is DD-land- Westeros. Joffrey and Tywin died in KL and not during war but when the Lannisters were in power.

On 22.06.2017 at 7:22 PM, Jaehaerys Stark said:

Myrcella was safe and in love with her betrothed in Dorne.  Cersei brought about the whole Tyrion-on-trial-for-Joffrey's-death thing, which led to the trial by combat that resulted in the death of Oberyn.  The Red Vipers death drove Ellaria to kill Prince Doran and murder Myrcella.

Tyrion was right.  He drinks and he knows things...

Oh please.

The trial by combat was Tyrion's idea.

The championing was Oberyn's idea. The screaming-instead-of-killing-the-damn-enemy was also Oberyn's idea.

The trial itself, if I remember correctly, was Tywin's idea. Cersei would've been OK with Tyrion executed immediately right then and there.

And Tyrion was Olenna's designated scapegoat. Cersei was far from being the only person to suspect him of Joff's murder. It was kingslaying right under everyone's noses, it was a little hard to avoid blaming anyone and declare 'Oh well, he was an ass anyway, someone had to kill him, let's move on.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Tianzi said:

Oh please.

The trial by combat was Tyrion's idea.

The championing was Oberyn's idea. The screaming-instead-of-killing-the-damn-enemy was also Oberyn's idea.
 

The trial itself, if I remember correctly, was Tywin's idea. Cersei would've been OK with Tyrion executed immediately right then and there.

And Tyrion was Olenna's designated scapegoat. Cersei was far from being the only person to suspect him of Joff's murder. It was kingslaying right under everyone's noses, it was a little hard to avoid blaming anyone and declare 'Oh well, he was an ass anyway, someone had to kill him, let's move on.'

The trial by combat WAS Tyrion's idea.  He realized it was is best chance at beating a rigged trial.  Oberyn DID chose to champion Tyrion, to get revenge against the Mountain.  Olenna DID use Tyrion as a scapegoat.  These were just matters of coincidence and convenience.  They only happened because of the trial.  It was not Tywin's idea to have a trial, more so a necessary matter of procedure.  They had to have a trial because they could not know Tyrion killed Joffrey without one, which he didn't of course.  But that didn't matter.  Tywin and Cersei both knew that Tyrion didn't kill Joffrey.  They just saw an easy out for getting rid of Tyrion once and for all.  Everything else just fell into place after that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said in my first post, I think some people overestimate Tyrion's cleverness. Just because he reads books, and the show portrays him as smart, that doesn't mean that he actually, is if we look it objectively. He didn't even understand that Shae was a paid prostitude. He made the wrong decision in Meereen and they would have lost the city if Daenerys didn't come at the exact time with the Dragons. He would lost King's Landing if Tywin didn't come with the Tyrells. Basically we haven't watched any Tyrion's decision to be right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Cron said:

This is an interesting discussion, with many excellent points already having been made.

There are a lot of ways we could look at this.

One way would be to say Myrcella was doomed (and IS doomed in the books) b/c of the prophecy, which is undoubtedly true.  Myrcella would have died no matter where she was sent (or not sent, if she had stayed in King's Landing).

On the other hand, looking back on it, knowing what Tyrion surely must have known at the time, I have to say...he sent her to DORNE???

Tyrion HAD to have known there were people in Dorne who hated the Lannisters (cuz of what happened to Elia and her children, at the hands of a Lannister man, Gregor Clegane).  So, of all places, he sends her to DORNE??

Why didn't he send her to Casterly Rock?  Has this ever been discussed or considered?  Even if you argue he wanted to marry her off to make alliances, my goodness, I think the way he went about it was idiotically dangerous.  Hey, I've got an idea. Maybe he should have sent Myrcella to Casterly Rock and let Trystane come to HER.

 

Yeah, I see your point, Tyrion assumed a lot about the Dornish just because Doran was (seemed to be) a pacifist. 

As for brining Tristane to the rock, show could have done that, it would have given them a chance to entirely skip the Dorne storyline. In the books though Elia and Oberyn went to the Rock to visit the twins in hope of a marriage pact, but Tywin refused the match because he was waiting for Aerys to offer to wed Rhaegar to Cersei. So the Martells probably wouldn't have taken that trip again after a first unpleasant experience followed by more unpleasant experience. They were probably only open to a Lannister match if they made the gestures (and trips) this time. 

14 hours ago, Cron said:

Great food for thought.

I think only GRRM can definitively answer this question, cuz it relates to how "magic" works in the universe of ASOIAF.

But here's my understanding of it:  Prophecies are real in ASOIAF, and DO come true (assuming the are foretold by people who actually have the gift, or "magic," of prophecy).  Naturally, as with so much fantasy fiction, it almost NEVER works out the way it at first seems it will, but it DOES come true. To my knowledge, Maggy's prophecies were all real, and have come true.

I think you basically raise a question about "self-fulfilling prophecies"(my words).   My view:  Doesn't matter whether we are talking about self-fulfilling prophecies here or not, it seems clear to me that in the ASOIAF universe, ALL of Cersei's children are doomed, one way or the other.

But again, that's just my view.  Only GRRM knows for sure, I think.  If he says I'm wrong, then I'm wrong, in the context of ASOIAF.

Interesting. 

I'm not someone who follows what GRRM says about These things in interviews, but some hard-core fans argue (based on GRRM interviews and the like) that there's no such thing as prophecy and grrm's overall message is that believing in all sorts of prophecies, be that religious or superstitious or magical, is wrong, they are all bullshit and people are responsible fore their own fates, their own actions form it, and the only reason prophecies come true is because people self-fulfill them. 

I personally think this is an absolutely stupid approach. Why on god's earth would you litter your 10000 pages long story with prophecies if you want to convince the world that prophecies are bullshit? GRRM uses prophecies as plot device and possibly also as a structural device for symbolism and parallels and such. That's like saying that the thing driving my plot is wrong, it's just such a paradox for me. I also know that the message of the story is supposed to that war and feudalism is terrible. Again, I don't see why you would write 10000 pages of captivating plot set in a context that you want to portray as terrible. I'm aware that I'm quite a shallow reader aand I don't look for the meaning of life in a novel like asoiaf, but I sincerely doubt that the average asoiaf reader follows this story because it's such a great anti-war agenda. 

(This is my personal opinion and not a fact  or not anybody else's opinion, that I know of- in case that's not clear to anybody ) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RhaenysB said:

Yeah, I see your point, Tyrion assumed a lot about the Dornish just because Doran was (seemed to be) a pacifist. 

As for brining Tristane to the rock, show could have done that, it would have given them a chance to entirely skip the Dorne storyline. In the books though Elia and Oberyn went to the Rock to visit the twins in hope of a marriage pact, but Tywin refused the match because he was waiting for Aerys to offer to wed Rhaegar to Cersei. So the Martells probably wouldn't have taken that trip again after a first unpleasant experience followed by more unpleasant experience. They were probably only open to a Lannister match if they made the gestures (and trips) this time. 

Interesting. 

I'm not someone who follows what GRRM says about These things in interviews, but some hard-core fans argue (based on GRRM interviews and the like) that there's no such thing as prophecy and grrm's overall message is that believing in all sorts of prophecies, be that religious or superstitious or magical, is wrong, they are all bullshit and people are responsible fore their own fates, their own actions form it, and the only reason prophecies come true is because people self-fulfill them. 

I personally think this is an absolutely stupid approach. Why on god's earth would you litter your 10000 pages long story with prophecies if you want to convince the world that prophecies are bullshit? GRRM uses prophecies as plot device and possibly also as a structural device for symbolism and parallels and such. That's like saying that the thing driving my plot is wrong, it's just such a paradox for me. I also know that the message of the story is supposed to that war and feudalism is terrible. Again, I don't see why you would write 10000 pages of captivating plot set in a context that you want to portray as terrible. I'm aware that I'm quite a shallow reader aand I don't look for the meaning of life in a novel like asoiaf, but I sincerely doubt that the average asoiaf reader follows this story because it's such a great anti-war agenda. 

(This is my personal opinion and not a fact  or not anybody else's opinion, that I know of- in case that's not clear to anybody ) 

Great post, I read it all with interest, and agree so much that I'm not sure what I can add to it.  HARR!!!

Perhaps these things, though (not disagreeing with you in any way, but just adding to what you said):

(1)  Oberyn and Elia went to Casterly Rock in the show-version,, too.  I'm not saying you said they DIDN'T, just commenting on it.   In the show, Oberyn tells Tyrion about it in the conversation where Oberyn agrees to be Tyrion's champion.  As I recall, Oberyn basically says he was all excited to see the "monster," but was then disappointed to see that Tyrion was just a little baby.

(2)  Regarding the anti-war agenda:  I have great respect for all posters and contributors here. I really, really do.  But some of the most surprising stuff I've ever read on-line about GoT are theories that in the end, there will be no "final battle," but rather, a great peace will be NEGOTIATED between the Forces of Life and Forces of Death.  If this happens, my socks will be shocked right off my feet, and my mind will be officially BLOWN.  But hey, who knows, maybe that's what my future holds for me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

6 hours ago, Jaehaerys Stark said:

The trial by combat WAS Tyrion's idea.  He realized it was is best chance at beating a rigged trial.  Oberyn DID chose to champion Tyrion, to get revenge against the Mountain.  Olenna DID use Tyrion as a scapegoat.  These were just matters of coincidence and convenience.  They only happened because of the trial.  It was not Tywin's idea to have a trial, more so a necessary matter of procedure.  They had to have a trial because they could not know Tyrion killed Joffrey without one, which he didn't of course.  But that didn't matter.  Tywin and Cersei both knew that Tyrion didn't kill Joffrey.  They just saw an easy out for getting rid of Tyrion once and for all.  Everything else just fell into place after that...

'Oh, my son just died suffering in my arms murdered on his own wedding. Never mind finding the murderer, hurray, let's use it as a pretext to get rid of Tyrion!'

Well, what you're saying is probably true about Tywin, but Cersei was completely, if incorrectly convinced that Tyrion was a murderer. And so were many at the court, and so probably would we if we were sitting there instead of watchind the series and knowing better.

Edited by Tianzi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017. 06. 26. at 7:03 PM, Cron said:

Great post, I read it all with interest, and agree so much that I'm not sure what I can add to it.  HARR!!!

Perhaps these things, though (not disagreeing with you in any way, but just adding to what you said):

(1)  Oberyn and Elia went to Casterly Rock in the show-version,, too.  I'm not saying you said they DIDN'T, just commenting on it.   In the show, Oberyn tells Tyrion about it in the conversation where Oberyn agrees to be Tyrion's champion.  As I recall, Oberyn basically says he was all excited to see the "monster," but was then disappointed to see that Tyrion was just a little baby.

(2)  Regarding the anti-war agenda:  I have great respect for all posters and contributors here. I really, really do.  But some of the most surprising stuff I've ever read on-line about GoT are theories that in the end, there will be no "final battle," but rather, a great peace will be NEGOTIATED between the Forces of Life and Forces of Death.  If this happens, my socks will be shocked right off my feet, and my mind will be officially BLOWN.  But hey, who knows, maybe that's what my future holds for me...

Not sure why I forgot to respond to this.

1. I know, but i don't think the show touched on the purpose of their visit or Tywin's rejecting the offer. 

2. Yeah, the Others are good and misunderstood is also a very interesting concept as is the obsessive need to see westeros as a modern democracy. As if that kind of thing went down in the span of a year in actual history... the emerging of a democratic westeros at the end of the series is the most unrealistic possibility in my opinion. (I also wouldn't like it as a message for several reasons) as for the others' being good. well I would kinda be pissed off if I wasted my life on reading about the great fight for the living and light  only to find out there's actually no fight. because the dead and darkness aren't actually a threat, they just had a difficult childhood and they will sign a North Wall Treaty of peace and mutual support against common enemies after the starks tell them they had a difficult childhood too. Sorry for the sarcasm, I'm not that cynical usually.  But you get what I mean. Thousands of pages of buildup for a big cheesy inconsistent nothing? I wouldn't like that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, RhaenysB said:

Yeah, the Others are good and misunderstood is also a very interesting concept as is the obsessive need to see westeros as a modern democracy. As if that kind of thing went down in the span of a year in actual history... the emerging of a democratic westeros at the end of the series is the most unrealistic possibility in my opinion. (I also wouldn't like it as a message for several reasons) as for the others' being good. well I would kinda be pissed off if I wasted my life on reading about the great fight for the living and light  only to find out there's actually no fight. because the dead and darkness aren't actually a threat, they just had a difficult childhood and they will sign a North Wall Treaty of peace and mutual support against common enemies after the starks tell them they had a difficult childhood too. Sorry for the sarcasm, I'm not that cynical usually.  But you get what I mean. Thousands of pages of buildup for a big cheesy inconsistent nothing? I wouldn't like that. 

I'm looking forward to the excitement of a big final battle, but an ending of peace isn't necessarily cheesy or inconsistent. I mean, Twilight did it? ;) And I'm sure GRRM could do it well. He's more likely to write something along the lines of a big final battle that results in a treaty. But anyway, it's important to recognise the author's own views, and GRRM is anti-war and anti-feudalism (I should hope most people are). He hammers home just how devastating war is, and how unjust feudalism is, and I consider it a major theme. The show has largely missed out on these themes, so I may be wrong, but I personally consider this a part of why the adaptation is poor. But, there are also themes of "magical" bloodlines, so I don't know. Considering the political views GRRM has expressed, I consider ASOIAF to be definitely anti-war, and possibly anti-feudalism. I'm not saying we're going to end the novels with Westeros being reformed into a parliamentary democracy with free education and a national health service, but I think it will be in part a story of a big social shift that will ultimately improve Westeros. I can see something along the lines of more rights for peasants, more freedom of marriage for nobles, gender-equal inheritance. Westeros is already pretty good compared to Medieval Europe - gender equality in Dorne, freedom of religion. Even the Andal succession laws of a daughter before an uncle; here in the 21st century UK many noble titles can only be passed to male relatives of the male line, and if the male line dies the family lose their lands and titles. The War for the Dawn will bring with it massive devastation, and big social change is to be expected. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now